
Description Is Not Only for The Story
The question that inspired the article
On one of the Facebook writing groups I casually take part of, a question was asked. A girl provided a picture of an expensive mansion at asked how others would describe it.
This wasn’t as inspiring as the answers that came. Of course there were a handful of those that provided paragraphs that represented their unique and creative styles but a lot of members responded with short (5 words tops) descriptions. What’s important is that lots of them also asked or simply stated one thing:
“Is this important for the story/plot?”
And it’s not only the case of this one question nor this single group. I see this happen on Reddit feeds and in many articles.
Have You been treated with similar advice? Didn’t you feel like it’s a good advice but something is wrong abut it? Like it’s oversimplifying a deeper subject?
Well, as much as I agree with keeping only the most important things in the story I also want to provided some cases where description isn’t serving the story/plot (directly) and yet serves an important role for the whole piece.
Common response — don’t waste description on things that aren’t relevant for the story

When writing a description ask yourself:
Is the thing (I try to describe) important for the story?
The common rule says that if the answer is “no” then scrap the description or shorten it to the bare minimum.
By doing this you will create a clear and coherent narration. Nothing bad about that, right?
It also might be linked to the old dramatic principle: Chekhov's gun. In short:
If you place an item in a story and describe it, you should use it, if not now, then in later chapters.
Or if you have something important it should be described… and so on.
It’s a great rule to uphold and I do encourage you to remember about it.
The problem is of oversimplification of the principle. It’s not only about placing the items, it’s a principle that you need to understand on an abstract level. And on an abstract level its meaning is:
You shouldn’t craft a detail in your writing that won’t have a deeper meaning or wouldn’t serve the story.
If you misinterpret Chekhov’s gun principle you may by accident start removing all other things like red herrings, moody atmospheric descriptions that tune the reader or any other fragment’s that helped establish the setting or the main character.
So bottom line is: follow Chekhov’s gun but don’t get trigger happy with it.
Know this — everything is connected (to the story)

You can’t take one part of writing and pull it out without affecting all other elements.
Some things are obvious:
- if remove a character the story will be affected
- if you change the setting the story might get affected
- if you change the POV character the story might get affected
What we tend to forget is that as colors affect movies so does mood and atmosphere have influence on the reader and his perception of the story. All of those create different effect:
- when you place a romantic kiss in a room or in a dirty room or in a palace bedroom
- or when you say “they just kissed”
- or when you use description to create a freeze frame of all the small details that were happening at the moment of the kiss
- also if you use poetic language, metaphors or understatements
The right approach will emphasize the right mood, the right theme, the right character trait and so on — at the end emphasizing the readers’ reception of the overall story.
In next parts I will talk about some elements like atmosphere, character influenced descriptions and so on. Those might be viewed as “not important for the story” at first but they can be traced back to it.
A description of seemingly irrelevant item might say something about a trait of a main character that will create a certain response in a reader that later comes into play in an important plot event — everything is connected.
But…
If something seems not connected enough, it might be a sign that it should be scraped.
What are some ways that serve the story indirectly?
Description is the mirror of the point of view character

This is the mostly apparent in the first point of view stories but not only.
When writing descriptions, one should remember about the mood of the point of view character and if it should affect it.
This depends on your style and chosen narration but sometimes when you do describe things you might include some personal emotions and thoughts of the point of view character. It’s easier when the character is the narrator but it’s not necessary.
Then a description of seemingly unimportant thing tells the reader something about the character not the item. It’s still useful if the item isn’t relevant for the plot/story directly.
Imagine a snow globe on characters’ desk and how it’s description changes in each chapter depending on the protagonist mood. The snow globe is never used for anything but each description reveals something about the character.
You also might describe different things depending on the mood of the protagonist.
It’s a bit different but let’s say a character walks into the same room in two different moments. At first, you will give descriptions of various wood carved figures and for the second time you will describe all the sharp rusty tools. The first time the character was happy or calm — the second time the character is scared and fears for his life. This switch in focus will act as emphasis for his/her mood.
One very interesting way to use such approach is when you have multiple POV characters, let them notice the same object but use the description to emphasize differences between them. One might find a sports car fascinating and the other will roll his eyes and move on.
Description builds atmosphere

It’s a followup to the previous example.
One thing is following the characters’ mood but the second thing is building a mood in a reader.
Sometimes you describe items that again aren’t relevant to the story but by describing them you build an atmosphere. Like with the sharp rusty objects in a workshop that I mentioned earlier but also all descriptions of dark corridors, children playing, colorful sunrises, sunsets and more. They all build certain emotions in the reader and emotions are what you want to create.
With one well crafted paragraph you may give a panorama of a scene. This will not only help the reader stay oriented but also might give him the right cues of how he should be feeling.
It’s also when a carefully placed lighting strike makes an emphasis or sudden gush of cold wind foreshadow dire things to come.
Writing isn’t always a simulation of life where people face tragedies in a middle of sunny days, it’s a place of coincidences and hidden meanings, where even the nature cries and laughs at the most timely fashion.
Description helps in building the setting

Panorama of a city might give the mood, add flying cars and it builds a setting as well.
I got one word: Tolkien.
Say what you want about his lengthy descriptions and how they chop the narration into a slogging mess but he did paint Middle Earth with such detail that one might consider his books a tour guide manuals. You not only get the story but you can breathe in history of the land and folks living in there. I don’t encourage you to go too such extreme but I do want you to know that a well crafted descriptions will help transport your readers into your setting, even if it’s not a fantasy or science fiction.
A genre allows certain description

You might have got it from the previous point but I will say it not the least:
Certain genres call for certain descriptions.
A contemporary fiction might need less of them, because everything is well known to the reader — and that’s when you should keep descriptions more close to the story. On the other side of the spectrum you have fantasy genres or historical fiction where readers actually do expect some amount of descriptions even if they aren’t so much relevant to the plot — they are relevant to the setting and that’s what matters in that case.
There is one important thing to remember though, as quoting one of the Reddit users:
“I put down the book when descriptions stop being historically accurate.”
Ouch… don’t betray the audience and the audience won’t betray you, huh?
Last but not least — description is a toolbox in a toolbox

OK, before you go and use all the knew knowledge on your manuscript — stop.
Remember when I said that adhering too strictly to Chekhov’s Gun might actually cripple your text? The same things apply to all the other points I gave.
“I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail.”
Abraham Maslow, 1966
Writing is an exercise in moderation and precision. You can’t use the same tool all the time. Only the right amount will help you create a distinctive style.
But don’t forget that description can be used in more than just describing things, you can emphasize details, reveal character, build atmosphere, reveal setting and adhere to genre standards with it. It’s truly not a tool but a toolbox of its’ own.
